What the 2015 UK Election means for Animals

When the UK elected a new parliament last week, voters confounded all the pundits (including me) who had trusted the polls. Two of the three vegan MPs lost their seats. Three other other animal advocates lost seats in the collapse of the Liberal Democrats (the former minority government party). The new Conservative majority government is planning a vote to repeal the ban on foxhunting. Meanwhile, the tiny “Animal Welfare Party” expanded their profile and vote share.

The people of Britain seem to have spoken: let us hunt more foxes, deer, pheasants and other animals; let us have our entertainment while non-domesticated animals suffer in circuses; let us continue to prop up industries exploiting farmed animals…

Some background for non-Brits

In the UK, animal issues tend to fall along left/right lines, with exceptions such as ‘Blue Fox’ Conservatives against Foxhunting.

The 2010-5 parliament produced a coalition between the right-of-centre Conservatives and the smaller centrist Liberal Democrats. The agricultural industry tends to be part of the Conservative constituency, so when Kerry McCarthy MP led a debate about veganism, the minister she faced was a Conservative former farming manager. Although hunt supporters didn’t have the votes to reverse a ban on foxhunting, the coalition did reverse individual moves – such as a ban on cages for “game” birds.

The 2015 election had two dramatic outcomes: almost all Scottish constituencies elected Scottish Nationalists (56/59); and almost all Liberal Democrats lost their seats (49/57), mainly to their Conservative former partners in government. Polls had suggested the opposition Labour party would win a score or so seats from the Conservatives, giving no party an overall majority. Polls were wrong.

The major animal issues facing the Westminster parliament are the existing ban of foxhunting, the cull of badgers to protect the dairy and beef industry herds from tuberculosis (leading the moderate welfareist RSPCA to call for a milk boycott), and a proposed ban on wild animals in circuses.

Parliament loses the two vegan MPs elected in 2010

Cathy Jamieson, standing again for the seat of Kilmarnock and Loudon in Scotland, was the first victim of the almost complete wipeout of non-SNP MPs in the country. The swing to the Scottish National Party was an astounding 25.9%. As the night went on, this turned out to be typical.

Two of the ten targeted MPs were ousted – which is the normal turnover of marginal MPs at this election. But four of the animal advocates failed to defend their marginal seats. Why?

Two of them were Liberal Democrats. A party without any truly safe seats, many MPs were highly individualistic and relying on strong personal followings. In three cases, those interests lay with other animals. The Conservatives defeated:

Another loss was Naomi Long, the only ever MP for Northern Ireland’s non-sectarian Alliance Party. Her election in 2010 was assisted by a split between unionist parties (who identify as British rather than Irish and support the continuing union with Great Britain), so it is not a surprise that she lost when they united behind a single candidate.

The fourth was a more typical loss – a very tight marginal seat where the swing went against the incumbent by a fraction of a percentage. And that was Chris Williamson.

There may, of course, be campaigners in the new intake that I don’t know about, just as there were in 2010. (David Drew, who lost his seat in 2010, failed in his bid to return).

In 2010, I also reviewed the members of the All Party Group on Animal Welfare. Members are not consistently against foxhunting, badger culling, and wild animals in circuses, so I’m now skeptical the group deserved that focus. Even though its officers included Caroline Lucas, Jim Fitzpatrick, and David Amess.

More likely, voters take elections to the UK Parliament more seriously, and so are much happier to use their vote for the European Parliament as a protest. For example, right-wing anti-EU insurgents UKIP won 27% of the vote in elections to the EU parliament, halving to 13% for the UK parliament.

We did well in Camden in the EU elections last year… We appreciated that standing against the Green Party leader might cost us votes but, at the same time, we felt there were some advantages to be gained beyond votes.

We thought this constituency might get more media attention than others with Natalie Bennett and Kier Starmer standing as candidates there and we felt it an opportunity to raise awareness of our party and counter what we feel is a misconception that the Greens are the only option for those voting with animal welfare concerns in mind or represent the best policies on animal welfare.

AWP’s 736 national votes puts AWP ahead of a couple of the UK’s better known electoral minnows – Class War and the Natural Law Party.

The issue is devolved – the Scottish Parliament decides the issue for Scotland, and banned traditional foxhunting in 2002. But MPs from the pro-independence Scottish National Party refuse, on principle, to vote on laws that don’t affect Scotland – and leader Nicola Sturgeon gave foxhunting as an example.

If the SNP MPs can be convinced that foxes (and perhaps hunts) pay no respect to the unmarked rural border between England and Scotland, that will go a long way to close the gap.

Supporters of animal-specific parties will draw comfort from AWP’s slow rise. There may also be previously unknown animal advocates in the new intake. Stephen Lloyd, for example, didn’t get a mention in my 2010 post, but Animal Aid were begging people to keep him in 2015.

Britain is also no longer a unitary state where Westminster decides everything. Hunting will remain banned in Scotland. Jasmijn de Boo (UK Vegan Society) pointed out that many animal issues are decided at EU level.

While Animal Aid is determined to gain as much ground for animals as we can through the political process – and that means engaging with the new government, its ministers and back-benchers – we know the best prospects for advancing the cause of animal protection lie not with politicians but where they have always resided: amongst the general public.

As a thank you for reading your way through mostly bad news, here’s a picture of Mazzy

51.499480-0.124809

Rate this:

Westminster, London, UK

Recommend:

Like this:

Related

About Ian McDonald

I'm a British new media person with a passion for radio, and interested in the kind of stories best told when we see humans as part of the world of animal minds. I blogged about why I'm producing The Vegan Option.

2 responses to “What the 2015 UK Election means for Animals”

Educating the public is vital I agree – but on it’s own it will not bring about the changes we need for other animals. And although having a tory gov does suggest that progress for animals will not be a priority for the next few years, we cannot give up on the political fight. Only changes in laws and policies can offer real and lasting protection, we can’t rely on the whims of individuals – after all many of them have just voted for the tories!

Featured Posts

This audio trailer uses iTunes reviews and clips to show in two minutes why The Vegan Option is worth listening to. (Thank you to the many who have reviewed the show at their podcast provider!) Please consider sharing.